Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano during Day 5 of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte at the Senate of the Philippines in Pasay City on July 14, 2026. Also in the photo is Senator-judge Pia Cayetano. —File photo by Niño Jesus Orbeta \| INQUIRER
MANILA, Philippines — The reported objection of Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano to the impeachment court’s ruling to subpoena the financial records of Vice President Sara Duterte will not by itself overturn that decision, according to the House prosecutors.
In a press conference on Tuesday, Rep. Jose Manuel Tadeo “Chel” Diokno and Atty. Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr., counsel for the House Panel of Prosecutors, said Cayetano’s objections would be put on record but would not by itself overturn the ruling to grant subpoenas for specified financial and tax records involving the vice president.
“Under the rules of the Senate for impeachment, a senator-judge always has the right to file [an objection] if he doesn’t agree with the decision of the impeachment courts,” Diokno said in a mix of Filipino and English.
Article continues after this advertisement
READ: Senate needs VP financial docs to rule on unexplained wealth
He said the prosecution would study the senator-judge’s reasoning once an opinion had actually been submitted instead of responding to reports about a document it had not yet seen.
“We just want to see the different view of our mga senator-judges. We will also look into that once it has been filed,” he said.
Right to explain disagreement
Tolosa also acknowledged Cayetano’s right to explain his disagreement but distinguished a dissenting opinion from a successful challenge to the court’s ruling.
“He has the right to dissent, but it will not change the ruling, of course. The ruling will stand,” Tolosa said.
Article continues after this advertisement
On Monday, the impeachment court granted the prosecution’s request for subpoenas covering specified peso-denominated bank records, Anti-Money Laundering Council documents, and Bureau of Internal Revenue records relevant to the second article of impeachment, which alleges unexplained wealth and discrepancies between Duterte’s declared assets and financial activity.
The ruling excluded foreign-currency deposits and denied requests involving two entities for which the court found insufficient links. It also limited the use of records predating Duterte’s vice presidential term to establishing a financial baseline relevant to the allegations during her present term.
Article continues after this advertisement
Under the impeachment rules governing evidence, a ruling by the presiding officer becomes the court’s ruling unless a senator-judge asks for a formal vote. Tolosa said this was the procedure explained during Monday’s proceedings.
“He can rule unless someone objects, in which case it can be put to a vote,” Tolosa said.
READ: Senate subpoena on Duterte finance docs a ‘victory’ for people
The court directed the concerned banks, AMLC, and BIR to submit their records or appropriate returns to the clerk of court on July 30.
The AMLC documents will first undergo an in-camera review, while the issuance of the BIR subpoena does not automatically authorize disclosure of confidential tax records.
Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.
The subpoenas authorize only the acquisition and court review of specified documents. But they do not establish the truth of the allegations under Article II, nor do they make the records automatically admissible or prevent the defense from challenging their relevance, interpretation, and evidentiary weight. /atm